Discussion
In the present study, variations in various anatomical parameters of FR, relevant
to CI by posterior tympanotomy approach, were studied and compared with other studies.
These include variations in FR length, maximum FR width, FR width at level of round
window, RW visibility through FR. These parameters are likely to be affected by variations
in the origin and course of CTN. Prior knowledge of these variations is important,
to avoid complications of FN and CTN injury. In view of CI surgeries being routinely
performed now, it is the need of the hour to develop data for each racial group, so
that decision regarding ideal surgical approach and electrode designing can be undertaken.
With these goals in mind, we have compared our findings with the existing literature.
a) Distance from take-off point of CTN/crotch of CTN to the stylomastoid foramen (SMF)
In our study, there was variation in the origin of the CTN and hence, in the distance
from take-off point or crotch of CTN to stylomastoid foramen, with a mean of 4.08 ± 0.8 mm
and range of 2.06 to 5.5 mm. [Table 3] shows a comparison with different studies. This distance is similar to the mean
distance shown in the study of all the other authors.
Table 3
Distance between the chorda tympani nerve origin and the stylomastoid foramen. (comparison
of present study with other studies)
|
Author
|
Year
|
Total no of bones/ears operated
|
Mean distance (mm) from the crotch of the CTN to the SMF
|
Range
(mm)
|
|
Durcan[18] et al.
|
1967
|
NM
|
6 mm
|
|
|
Kullman GL et al[19]
|
1971
|
100 bones
|
5.3 mm
|
1.2 mm distal–10.9 mm proximal to SMF
|
|
Muren C et al[20]
|
1990
|
26 bones
|
4.8 mm
|
0 mm–10.0 mm
|
|
Proctor and Nager[21]
|
1991
|
NM
|
5 mm
|
1 mm distal–11 mm proximal to SMF
|
|
Yadav SPS et al.[22]
|
2006
|
25 bones
|
6.2 mm (±2.66 mm)
|
2 mm–12 mm
|
|
Maru et al[23]
|
2010
|
|
7.2 mm
|
0.2 mm–9.7 mm
|
|
Trost et al[14]
|
2011
|
|
2 or 3 cm
|
|
|
Liu et al[13]
|
2012
|
|
13.32 mm
|
5.93 mm–21.63 mm
|
|
Zou et al[24]
|
2012
|
|
2.67 mm (+/− 0.51 mm)
|
|
|
Our study
|
2017
|
35 bones
|
4.08 ± 0.8 mm
|
2.06–5.5 mm
|
Abbreviations: CTN, chorda tympani nerve; SMF, stylomastoid foramen.
As early as 1955, Haynes had observed that one feature of the FN that varies considerably
is the point at which the chorda tympani joins the parent nerve.[25] He said that contrary to the belief that the chorda tympani joins the FN at a fixed
distance above the stylomastoid foramen, it was not so. In one specimen, he found
the chorda tympani starting its recurrent course almost outside the stylomastoid foramen,
whereas in others, it joined the trunk almost at the level of the semicircular canal.
We also encountered one similar origin of CTN at the level of the lateral semicircular
canal.
Gray's Anatomy describes the CTN arising from the FN ∼ 6 mm above the stylomastoid
foramen.[15] In 1967, Durcan et al reported the distance from the chorda tympani to the stylomastoid
foramen to be 6 mm.[18] During 100 temporal bone dissections, Kullman et al noted the nerve to arise from
between 1.2 mm distal to 10.9 mm proximal to the stylomastoid foramen, with a mean
of 5.3 mm.[19] Muren et al noted a mean distance from the origin of the CTN to the SMF to be 4.8 mm
(range 0–10.0 mm).[20] Proctor and Nager noted that the origin of chorda tympani can vary from 1 mm distal
to 11 mm proximal to the stylomastoid foramen, with a mean of 5 mm.[21] In their study of 25 temporal bone dissection, Yadav et al found the distance to
range from 2 to 12 mm, with a mean distance of 6.2 mm.[22] Maru et al found CTN with intratemporal origin to arise at a mean of 7.2 mm (range
0.2–9.7 mm) proximal the stylomastoid foramen.[23] Trost et al described the chorda tympani emerging 2 or 3 cm above the stylomastoid
foramen but only made measurements of the chorda tympani in the infratemporal fossa
region.[14] Liu et al described chorda tympani as a very fine nerve (0.44 mm in diameter within
the tympanic cavity), and the distance between the chorda tympani and stylomastoid
foramen as ranging from 5.93 mm to 21.63 mm, with the average distance being 13.32 mm.[13] Zou et al found the distance from the crotch of the CTN to the stylomastoid foramen
to be 2.67 +/− 0.51 mm.[24]
From the above, it can be seen that the variation in origin of the CTN will give rise
to lots of variations in the dimensions of the FR, which may have implications in
cochlear implant surgery.
In our study, the site of origin of the CTN was 4.08 ± 0.8 mm, whereas it was 4 to
8 mm proximal to the stylomastoid foramen in 64% of temporal bones in the study conducted
by Yadav et al. Still, Kullman et al reported that CTN arose 3 mm proximal to stylomastoid
foramen in 75% of the cases they studied.[19]
[22]
As there is lot of variability in the origin of the CTN, mean values are not much
significant in this case. The range of variability should be known to the cochlear
implant surgeon to avoid inadvertent damage to the CTN. Hence, it is important to
report CTN injury in CI, so that real complication rate of FR approach can be known.
b) Variations in the course of chorda tympani
In our study, out of 35 temporal bones dissected, 6 showed major variations in the
course of the CTN. Four showed bifurcation of chorda tympani at the level of origin
itself from the vertical segment of the FN and one arose at the level of lateral semicircular
canal with chorda tympani crossing above the stapes and hence non-existent FR. In
one case, it branched into the posterior canal wall. ([Table 4])
As early as 1955, Haynes had observed one feature of the facial nerve that varies
considerably was the point at which the chorda tympani joins the parent nerve. 25
He said that contrary to the belief that the chorda tympani joins the facial nerve
at a fixed distance above the stylo-mastoid foramen, it was not so. In one specimen,
he found the chorda tympani starting its recurrent course almost outside the stylomastoid
foramen whereas in other it joined the trunk almost at the level of the semicircular
canal. We also encountered one similar origin of chorda tympani nerve at the level
of lateral semicircular canal.
Table 4
Variations in the course of the chorda tympani nerve. (comparison of present study
with previous studies)
|
Author
|
Year
|
Total no. of bones/ear operated
|
No. of cases of variation
|
Type of variation of chorda tympani
|
|
Haynes[25]
|
1955
|
NM
|
1 case
|
Chorda tympani arose outside the stylomastoid foramen.
|
|
1 case
|
Chorda tympani joined the main trunk almost at the level of the semicircular canal.
|
|
Minnigerode[26]
[27]
|
1965
|
NM
|
1 case
|
Branch of chorda tympani in middle ear
|
|
Histelberger and House[28]
|
1966
|
NM
|
1 case
|
A branch running through the posterior canal wall
|
|
Durcan et al.[18]
|
1967
|
NM
|
3 cases
|
Bifurcation of chorda tympani
|
|
Present study
|
2017
|
35
|
4 cases
|
Bifurcation of chorda tympani
|
|
1 case
|
Arose at the level of lateral semicircular canal
|
|
1 case
|
A branch to the posterior canal wall
|
In 1965, Minnigerode reported a case in which the chorda tympani, as it crossed the
long process of incus, gave off a small branch which was distributed to the posterosuperior
quadrant of tympanic membrane. He suggested that this nerve may be related to sensory
“Hautsinnesnerven” of lower vertebrates.[26]
[27] Histelberger and House demonstrated a branch from the chorda tympani running through
the posterior canal wall to the skin of the posterior aspect of external auditory
canal.[28] In 1967, Durcan et al reported 3 instances of bifurcation of CTN.[18] Nager and Proctor described that chorda tympani having extratemporal origin had
an incidence of only 2%.[21] Low noted an incidence of extratemporal origin higher than 50% in Chinese specimens.[29] Maru et al had findings similar to those of Nager and Proctor, with and incidence
of 5.7% of origin of CTN outside the stylomastoid foramen in 2 specimens.[21]
[23]
c) Chorda facial angle
The ean chorda facial angle in our study was 26.91° ± 1.19°, with range of 25° to
28.69 °. ([Table 5])
Table 5
Chorda facial angle (comparison of present study with previous studies)
|
Author
|
Year
|
Total no. of bones/ear operated
|
Type of study
|
Mean chorda facial angle (°)
(±SD)
|
|
Zhu Y et al[30]
|
2008
|
40 (20 cadavers) temporal bones
|
Cadaveric
|
24.8 degrees
|
|
Calli et al[31]
|
2010
|
30
|
Cadaveric
|
23.58° (±6.84)
|
|
Măru N et al[23]
|
2010
|
35
|
Cadaveric
|
26–35°
|
|
Jeon EJ et al[32]
|
2013
|
20
|
Radiologic (CT) in patients
|
18.40° ± 1.05°
|
|
Diogo I et al[33]
|
2016
|
65
|
Radiologic (CBCT) in postoperative patients
|
22.6 ± 9.5 °
|
|
Present study
|
2017
|
35
|
Cadaveric
|
26.91° ± 1.19 ° (range 25° –28.69°)
|
Abbreviations: CBCT, cone beam computed tomography; CT, computed tomography; SD, standard
deviation.
Zhu et al dissected 40 human temporal bones of 20 voluntary bone donors and relative
anatomical data of operation were observed and measured under operating microscope
through posterior tympanum approach entering posterior tympanum.[30] They found the angle of between the CTN and the FN to be 24.8 degrees. They had
concluded that the position of anatomic structure in the middle ear was constant and
the relationship, including distance and angle between anatomic structures, changed
in limited region. The anatomical parameters provide a reference value for avoiding
injury during the operation.
Calli et al made the use of computer-aided design software to measure the angle between
the FN and the CTN in 30 cadaveric adult temporal bones.[31] The mean angle was 23.58° (± 6.84). Their important finding was that there was a
correlation between the distance between the take-off point of the chorda tympani
and the PPP-SPI and the chorda facial angle, with an inverse relation; that is, the
former tended to be greater when the angle was less than the mean and vice versa.
This trend approached but did not quite reach statistical significance (r = -0.248,
p = 0.059) in their study.
Maru et al studied 35 temporal bones harvested from cadavers or human dried skulls,
after dissecting under the microscope or sectioning in different planes, with an electric
saw and diamond disc.[23] The temporal bones were analyzed on a stereomicroscope and photographed with a digital
camera. The images were then filtered and corrected with the image analysis software
DP-Soft. Measurements on X- and Y-axis (horizontal plane) were performed using a caliber
and the software measuring features. They found the angle between the CTN at its emerging
and the mastoid segment of the facial nerve to vary between 26 and 35°.
Jeon et al evaluated the surgical and radiologic anatomy of a cochleostomy produced
via posterior tympanotomy for CI.[32] Twenty computed tomography (CT) images of the temporal bones from patients aged
between 20 and 60 years were selected. Three-dimensional (3D) reconstructed images
were obtained using high-resolution axial temporal bone CT scans. Eight points were
used to evaluate the surgical anatomy of the posterior tympanotomy and cochleostomy.
The length of lines between the points and the angles between the lines were measured.
The mean angle of ABC (angle at which the CTN branched from the FN) was 18.40° ± 1.05°
in their study. Their study results were in favor of using 3D imaging of the FR and
round window to identify the FR before surgery. This may help to avoid injury to the
CTN and FN during posterior tympanotomy and to facilitate the insertion of the electrode
array during CI by creation of a wide posterior tympanotomy.
d) The distance between the take-off point of the chorda tympani/crotch and the PPP-SPI
In our study, there was great variation in the distance between the crotch and the
PPP-SPI, which was found to range from 9.4 mm to 18.56 mm, with a mean of 12.41 ± 2.91
mm. This results in variability in the size of the FR and hence, in the visibility
of the round window membrane. The FR length appeared to have positive correlation
with mastoid pneumatization, being higher in more pneumatized mastoid bones.
Calli et al studied the distance between the take-off point of the chorda tympani
and the PPP-SPI in 30 cadaveric adult temporal bones and found it to be 7.78 mm (± 2.68).[31]
Zou et al found the distance between the SPI and the crotch of the CTN to be 15.22
(+/− 0.83) mm.[24]
e) The maximum width of the FR
In our study, the average maximum width of FR was 2.93 ± 0.4 mm and, across different
bones, maximum FR width ranged from 2.24 to 3.45 mm. We did not find any case with
FR width less than 1 mm.
This is similar to the findings reported by Su et al and Young et al, of FR width
of 3.8 to 4.0 mm.[34]
[35]
Zou et al found the maximum width of the FR to be 2.73 (+/− 0.20) mm.[24]
Wang L et al and Wang LE et al, in their studies, found 32 patients with narrow FRs
of less than 1.0 mm.[36]
[37] The main reason for the narrow FR, according to them, was CTN retropositioning.
Wang et al dissected 16 human temporal bones of 8 adult cadaveric heads under surgical
microscope through FR approach, and measured the relative anatomic structures, such
as the bony entrance of the FR approach, the FN, stapes, round window, round window
niche, pyramidal eminence, cochleariform process, etc. and analyzed the data statistically.[38] They found the width of the bony entrance of the FR approach to be (2.94 +/− 0.32)
mm.
Jeon et al found the mean length of superior-inferior length of the posterior tympanotomy
for CI was 6.48 ± 0.26 mm, while the width of the FR was 3.60 ± 0.2 mm.[32]
Vaid et al proposed a grading system based on a 10-point scoring chart of high resolution
computed tomography (HRCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings in patients
being assessed preoperatively for CI.[39] The FR anatomy was considered as one of the parameters of difficulty encountered
during CI, in which a narrow FR of < 3 mm was considered unfavorable, whereas a wide
FR of > 3 mm was considered favorable.
In our study, the FR width ranged from 2.24 to 3.45 mm, and we did not find any case
with FR width less than 1 mm. We agree with the findings of Vaid et al, in the the
FR of < 3 mm is unfavorable.
We found a positive correlation between FR length, maximum width of FR and angle between
FN and CTN. Moreover, we observed that the distance between the crotch and the PPP-SPI
(FR length), the angle between the FN-CTN, and the maximum width of the FR were found
to show higher values in pneumatized temporal bones as compared with sclerotic and
diploic temporal bones. In our study, maximum effect of pneumatization of mastoid
was seen to occur on that of the FR length, as this parameter showed maximum variation.
In a study by Young and Nadol, the height of the extended FR at the stapes level was
4.0 mm in those bones with good pneumatization and 3.87 mm in the bones with poor
pneumatization.[35] At the round window, they found the height of FR to be 3.0 mm in bones with good
pneumatization and 3.05 mm in bones with poor pneumatization. However, no statistically
significant difference between the measurements was obtained for height of FR at round
window, or at stapes level, in bones with good and poor pneumatization. They did not
compare FR length or angle in bones with different pneumatization pattern.
From the above, we concluded that variation in the origin of CTN and pneumatization
pattern can influence the size of the FR.
f) The width of FR at level of round window
The mean width of the FR at the level of the round window in our study was 2.65 ± 0.41
mm. Our results are comparable to those of other studies.
He et al conducted a study of the anatomy related to CI guided by HRCT. Six temporal
bones were dissected according to the main steps of CI and scanned in axial and semilongitudinal
planes by HRCT to observe the relationship between anatomy and HRCT.[40] The width of the FR in dissection was 3.13 (+/− 0.34) mm at the level of the round
window, and 4.12 (+/− 0.44) mm at the level of the oval window. The width of FR in
HRCT was 3.20 (+/− 0.38) mm at the level of round window, and 4.14 (+/− 0.47) mm at
the level of oval window. The whole course of the FN was visualized clearly in semilongitudinal
plane. No statistically significant differences were found between the results of
dissection and those of HRCT
The value of the width of the FR at the level of the round window was 2.24 (+/− 0.18)
mm in the study by Zou et al.[24]
Wang L et al and Wang LE et al, in their studies, found 32 patients with narrow FRs,
with the average width at the level of the round window being 0.85 mm.[36]
[37] Hence, they described a new method of FR enlargement through suspending, ante displacing,
and adhering the CTN to the posterior wall of the auditory canal to expose the round
window, make the electrode insertion easier, and preserve the function of the FN and
CTN in cases in which the narrowest distance between the FN and the CTN was less than
1.0 mm.
The findings of our study were similar to those of Otzurk et al, who did not find
a FR width of less than 1 mm in any of their 24 cadavers.[17] They suggested a possibility of this difference being attributable to the dissection
limits, which could be more advanced in a cadaver study than in real life.
g) The location of maximum width of the FR into short process of incus and the crotch
of CTN
The average distance of location of maximum width of the FR from the SPI in our study
was 3.44 ± 0.4 mm, and from the crotch of the CTN it was 9.08 ± 2.6 mm, respectively.
Zou et al found that the location of maximum width of the FR into the SPI and the
crotch of CTN were 6.28 (+/− 0.41) mm and 9.81 (+/− 0.71) mm, respectively.[24]
h) Round window visibility through FR
We found that a thicker round window bony overhang was not associated with greater
difficulty in accessing round window. It was the orientation and size of the round
window (that is, how posterior and inferior it was), rather than thickness of the
bony overhang, which better predicted the difficulty with round window access.
In all our cases, FR was wide enough at the level of round window to get adequate
exposure of round window niche and round window membrane for round window insertion
of electrodes.
We observed that the cause of limited visibility of round window was, that the round
window was positioned posteromedial to the FN and that CTN ante placement, as advocated
by Wang et al would not improve round window exposure.[36]
[37] In all the cadavers in our study, round window exposure was obtained but in some,
additional positioning of the table was required. The FN appeared to be at risk in
cases of posteriorly placed round window. In such cases, prior adjustments of the
table may help prevent damage. Facial recess enlargement by sacrificing or repositioning
CTN would offer no benefit in terms of visualization of round window niche or membrane. For this, we would recommend prior imaging to identify posteriorly placed round window
niche. The findings of our study were similar to those of Otzurk et al, who also stated
that the cause of limited visibility of RW in their series of all partially exposed
round windows of cadavers was posteromedial placement of round window in relation
to the FN and they felt that CTN ante placement would not improve round window exposure.[17]
In an anatomical study, Hamamoto et al favored cochleostomy insertion of electrodes
as, according to them, reliable round window access could not be achieved by posterior
tympanotomy through the FR.[16] However, Otzurk et al found that total round window exposure could be achieved through
the FR in most temporal bones (79.2%).[17] According to them, total exposure of the round window will allow round window insertion
of the cochlear implant electrodes. They interpreted their results with maximum exposure
of round window with microscope adjustment only. No table adjustment was mentioned
in their study. We achieved near complete exposure of the round window niche in all
(100%) cases, with table adjustment in “head low” and “posterior tilt” position. Fixed
radiologic landmarks may help identify a posteriorly placed round window niche but
give an exaggerated picture of real-life problem situation. Hence, more studies need
to be conducted on practical intraoperative situations correlated with radiologic
determinants.
Leong et al reported that the round window was visible in more than 50 to 89% of adult
and 78% of pediatric cases after an optimal posterior tympanotomy.[41] In cases in which the round window niche cannot be totally exposed, attempting further
dissection of the anatomic boundaries may cause injury to FN and/or CTN. Promontory
cochleostomy antero-inferior to round window might be preferred in such cases.
This was in contrast to the results of Wang et al, who reported 32 cases with a width
of FR narrower than 1 mm, in which they suggested CTN ante placement to widen the
FR and obtain adequate exposure of round window niche.[36]
[37] These differences could be attributable to racial differences or limited sample.
In a previous study, Lee et al reported that the angle between the cortex of the external
ear canal and the FN was highly correlated with visibility through posterior tympanotomy.[42] They suggested that pneumatic mastoids, but not sclerotic mastoids, could have a
more complex relationship with FR anatomy, including various other factors that were
not considered in their study.
Pendem et al studied the accuracy of HRCT temporal bone measurements in predicting
the actual visualization of round window niche as viewed through posterior tympanotomy
(such as, FR) in a prospective study of 37 cochlear implant candidates, aged between
1 and 6 years old.[43] The distance between the short process of incus and the round window niche and the
distance between the oval window and the round window niche were measured preoperatively
on sub-millimeter (0.7 mm) HRCT images. They classified the visibility of the round
window niche based on the surgical view (that is, through posterior tympanotomy) during
surgery into three types: 1) Type 1—fully visible, 2) Type 2—partially visible, and
3) Type 3—difficult to visualize. The preoperative HRCT measurements were used to
predict the type of visualization of round window niche before surgery and correlated
with the findings during surgery.
We observed that cases of type-3 visibility (difficult to visualize) of round window
niche, through posterior tympanotomy, are the ones with posteriorly and inferiorly
placed round window niche. In such cases pre-operative identification by imaging may
alert the surgeon and he may make necessary adjustments on the table to avoid nerve
injury.
Another correlation in our study, was the distance between the crotch of the CTN and
the posterior most portion of short process of incus, with the visibility of round
window. If this distance is less, and round window is also inferior, it will further
make exposure of wound window difficult, without injury to CTN or FN. As there was
wide variation in this parameter in our study, narrow limits of FR between crotch
and short process of incus could cause difficulty in exposure of round window.